Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Canary Boy

Samba...

Recommended Posts

Ian Holloway: “He''s got another year with us but I can''t see him progressing. I

have got some young lads who he is in the way of. I need to make room

for them. If he can''t progress I would like him to go somewhere else.”If if is not that good, why are we reportedly interested?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Canary Boy"]Ian Holloway: “He''s got another year with us but I can''t see him progressing. I have got some young lads who he is in the way of. I need to make room for them. If he can''t progress I would like him to go somewhere else.”

If if is not that good, why are we reportedly interested?


[/quote]

Because he''s on a free... just like shawcross whos a loan.....so thats just ask....WHERE THE HECK IS A PERMANANT LONG TERM CENTRAL DEFENDER WE NEED SO BADLY??? Dear i say we''re all spent out??? I await the usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

[quote user="Canary Boy"]Ian Holloway: “He''s got another year with us but I can''t see him progressing. I have got some young lads who he is in the way of. I need to make room for them. If he can''t progress I would like him to go somewhere else.”

If if is not that good, why are we reportedly interested?


[/quote]

Because he''s on a free... just like shawcross whos a loan.....so thats just ask....WHERE THE HECK IS A PERMANANT LONG TERM CENTRAL DEFENDER WE NEED SO BADLY??? Dear i say we''re all spent out??? I await the usual.

[/quote]

for once, in my eyes, you are right XD

However, if we could get a descent defender on loan until the end of the season, we can make a permenent signing based upon our status. Premiership, Championship, or, the least likely in my opinion, League One.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should be concentrating our efforts on a  CD not this rhubarb. 

If Riordan is no good to us why is this bloke?  Could it be that he is available for free and Riordan is not? Not suprised in a way, just confirms my suspicions that Grant probably has £500,000 at the very most available to him.  Where is the money?  I have lowered my expectations, I would be happy with Riordan and Shawcross on a loan to be going into the new season with.  But it ain''t gonna happen.

Riordan is much better than this lad, and the only reason we won''t go for him is that we can''t afford him.  Grant does know where to play Riordan, the fact is we can not afford him. 

This lad would be more of a headache, not so much where do you play him, but will he ever be good enough to get a game?

I can''t see any other explanation for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="scotty is here LOL"]yeah i can''t believe it has been nearly 7 years since we bought a centre half according to eatern daily press this morning thats bad[/quote]

What about Doherty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Northern Canary"][quote user="scotty is here LOL"]yeah i can''t believe it has been nearly 7 years since we bought a centre half according to eatern daily press this morning thats bad[/quote]

What about Doherty?[/quote]

Apparently, according to the pinkun, Doc was bought ''primarily as a centre forward''.   That is certainly not how I remember it - he was actually bought to replace Malky but did start a few matches up front as an ''emergency measure''.  But, hey, let''s not let the truth get in the way of a good story!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]Doherty was bought as a ''utility player''.   I think initially the plans for Doherty were midfield, with occasional cover in defence.[/quote]

Not midfield, he was bought to play upfront and at the back. Mind you we know how effective he can be in midfield (ahem).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

[quote user="Canary Boy"]Ian Holloway: “He''s got another year with us but I can''t see him progressing. I have got some young lads who he is in the way of. I need to make room for them. If he can''t progress I would like him to go somewhere else.”If if is not that good, why are we reportedly interested?

[/quote]

Because he''s on a free... just like shawcross whos a loan.....so thats just ask....WHERE THE HECK IS A PERMANANT LONG TERM CENTRAL DEFENDER WE NEED SO BADLY??? Dear i say we''re all spent out??? I await the usual.

[/quote]Loanees can work wonders, as our championship winning season shows. So long as the right ones are brought in, and as is already stated the possibility to sign on perminatly later is always possiblity or allow us to have more time to search for other defenders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

[quote user="Canary Boy"]Ian Holloway: “He''s got another year with us but I can''t see him progressing. I have got some young lads who he is in the way of. I need to make room for them. If he can''t progress I would like him to go somewhere else.”

If if is not that good, why are we reportedly interested?


[/quote]

Because he''s on a free... just like shawcross whos a loan.....so thats just ask....WHERE THE HECK IS A PERMANANT LONG TERM CENTRAL DEFENDER WE NEED SO BADLY??? Dear i say we''re all spent out??? I await the usual.

[/quote]

The signing of Bambi doing the samba on a free???

Where is the problem? 

More money saved and more money in that ''litle black hole'' known as the bank.... surely it has to be a fantastic move doesn''t it???  [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

[quote user="Northern Canary"][quote user="scotty is here LOL"]yeah i can''t believe it has been nearly 7 years since we bought a centre half according to eatern daily press this morning thats bad[/quote]

What about Doherty?[/quote]

Apparently, according to the pinkun, Doc was bought ''primarily as a centre forward''.   That is certainly not how I remember it - he was actually bought to replace Malky but did start a few matches up front as an ''emergency measure''.  But, hey, let''s not let the truth get in the way of a good story!!!

[/quote]

No Simon Charlton and Helveg (who could play centre) were brought in to replace Malky, Doherty was brought in as a striker, because we basically had nobody! Was his debut away to Newcastle where he scored the equaliser? i know we didn''t sign the Doc till a few games in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what do u mean we cant afford to sign riordan the lads worth about 750 grand max and as far as im concerned we still have a good 3million in the kitty.riordan would be a bargain at that much and is twice as good as any of our strikers now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says that he is not good? Ian Holloway says it, but is there more to this than meets the eye? Perhaps it is a personality clash; perhaps the player has been too long at the same club. As he was rated as a good player and indeed Man u did show an interest in the past, there is every likelihood that he can resurrect his career and perhaps a move to Norfolk may be the trigger he needs.

If he shows up well on the training ground and there is no fee involved, why not give him a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

We should be concentrating our efforts on a  CD not this rhubarb. 

[/quote]

Perhaps we''re concentrating our efforts on both? There have been fairly strong rumours on here and WOTB that we''re about to sign Shawcross on loan and we''ve put in a bid for Davenport.

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

If Riordan is no good to us why is this bloke?  Could it be that he is available for free and Riordan is not? Not suprised in a way, just confirms my suspicions that Grant probably has £500,000 at the very most available to him.  Where is the money?  I have lowered my expectations, I would be happy with Riordan and Shawcross on a loan to be going into the new season with.  But it ain''t gonna happen.

[/quote]

Was PG ever interested in Riordan? I only ask because I can''t recall this ever being confirmed (apologies if it has and I just missed it.). We''ve been "linked" with him but we get linked with a different player in the press every couple of days. It seems to me that people are using Riordan to prove how unambitious we are even though they have no idea whether PG wants to sign him.

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

Riordan is much better than this lad, and the only reason we won''t go for him is that we can''t afford him.  Grant does know where to play Riordan, the fact is we can not afford him. 

This lad would be more of a headache, not so much where do you play him, but will he ever be good enough to get a game?

I can''t see any other explanation for this.

[/quote]

If we are looking to sign Samba then there''s no doubt that it is down to the fact that he''s free, I wouldn''t want to see us spend any of our transfer budget on him. However, I don''t see why that''s such a bad thing. He was highly rated as a kid and just seems to have got a bit lost ever since. If we can be the ones to unlock the potential he obviously has then we''re on to a winner, if he turns out to be crap then we''ve not really lost anything. If he was coming here as our first choice striker then I could understand people getting upset but he''s not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Was PG ever interested in Riordan? I only ask because I can''t recall this ever being confirmed (apologies if it has and I just missed it.)"

I think he was quoted as saying he was interested. If I could find out where this was I''d post the link (probably in The Pink Un)

I still think we''d do better to pay money for players (like Riordan for example) than look for free''s. Lets not forget the transfer window where all our transfers were basically free transfers. Didn''t get us far did it? Remember we do want to have some premiership ambition even if we don''t go up this year in particular.

Free''s most likely mean they really are no good (unless they are simply out-of-contract like Brellier)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

geo374 -

there are loads of players that good be classed as good at some point in their careers but then they fade away.  And some who never even make it that far, have loads of potential but never make it.  Its several years now since this lad has shown anything.  It would be bordering on a miracle if he came good.  It rarely happens in sport and is very rare in football.

Shack Attack -

Shawcross has gone to Stoke.  We won''t buy Davenport, West Ham will want at least £1m and we don''t have that.

I do recall Grant saying he was interested in Riordan.  I can''t find the article, but does anyone else recall this?

See reply above to geo374. 

Believe me if Grant did have the money we all think he has, he would sign Riordan.  We need defenders, yet he only seems to be looking at loans.  He is looking at Carter to replace Safri / the injured Smith, yet he wants to bring him in loan, I mean loan a player who can''t get into another Champ side, whats going on?  Can you not see a pattern here?

I believe IMHO that -

Grant rates Davenport, yet we won''t buy him,

he rates Carter yet it looks like he will be trying to get him on loan,

he rates Riordan, yet won''t buy him.

Any other players that Grant would like to bring in won''t be buys, we may see 1 loan if we are lucky.  I''m sorry, but you can think up as many excuses or reasons for the above, but to me it all points to a lack of money.

Grant doesn''t have £3m, he doesn''t have £2m, he doesn''t even have £1m to spend on players.  I feel so sorry for Peter, all this money has come in to the club, he is trying to improve the team yet the board are restricting his ability to do this through restricting the transfer budget and perhaps other means, who knows?  And the board know that if it all goes wrong, they can blame Peter, say they backed him 100% that he spent lots of money on new players, quote the number of players he signed, factor in imaginary amounts and wages for 5 years to make it look like the players cost twice as much as they did.  Peter gets the sack and the board gets off scot free yet again.

cheers,

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everytime a player leaves we are told all the money from the sale will go into the transfer kitty.  With the money come in for the players we have sold, and the money we have spent on bringing in new players, we should still have at least 3 million in the kitty. Why we are trying to get players on loans is beyond me! There must be a reason why?

As for Riordan when grant first took over he tried to sign Marshall and Riordan from celtic. With Marshall coming on loan and  now has signed, when Riordan  said recently he wants a move everyone thought that Grant would go back for him too. It is a real shame because so many fans would love to have him here too, and i can''t understand myself why we have not tried to sign him.

There has to be more to why we are not buying players and only trying to get them on loan!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

geo374 -

there are loads of players that good be classed as good at some point in their careers but then they fade away.  And some who never even make it that far, have loads of potential but never make it.  Its several years now since this lad has shown anything.  It would be bordering on a miracle if he came good.  It rarely happens in sport and is very rare in football.

Shack Attack -

Shawcross has gone to Stoke.  We won''t buy Davenport, West Ham will want at least £1m and we don''t have that.

I do recall Grant saying he was interested in Riordan.  I can''t find the article, but does anyone else recall this?

See reply above to geo374. 

Believe me if Grant did have the money we all think he has, he would sign Riordan.  We need defenders, yet he only seems to be looking at loans.  He is looking at Carter to replace Safri / the injured Smith, yet he wants to bring him in loan, I mean loan a player who can''t get into another Champ side, whats going on?  Can you not see a pattern here?

I believe IMHO that -

Grant rates Davenport, yet we won''t buy him,

he rates Carter yet it looks like he will be trying to get him on loan,

he rates Riordan, yet won''t buy him.

Any other players that Grant would like to bring in won''t be buys, we may see 1 loan if we are lucky.  I''m sorry, but you can think up as many excuses or reasons for the above, but to me it all points to a lack of money.

Grant doesn''t have £3m, he doesn''t have £2m, he doesn''t even have £1m to spend on players.  I feel so sorry for Peter, all this money has come in to the club, he is trying to improve the team yet the board are restricting his ability to do this through restricting the transfer budget and perhaps other means, who knows?  And the board know that if it all goes wrong, they can blame Peter, say they backed him 100% that he spent lots of money on new players, quote the number of players he signed, factor in imaginary amounts and wages for 5 years to make it look like the players cost twice as much as they did.  Peter gets the sack and the board gets off scot free yet again.

cheers,

 

 

[/quote]

Spot on Broadslim, imo this is FACT. Grant has been given limted funds to strengthen the team in certain areas ie..the ones where players have left for big bucks and replaced with cheaper options..Earnie/Cureton..Safri/Smith and the rest have been cheap options, although they had to push the boat out with Mashall and even the board new that imo. I hope im proved wrong i really really do but how can anyone suggest,compared with teams like sheff u [Beattie] we are going to be up there? The blind will see what they want to see imo. Sorry but thats my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I''m sick of all this Riordan crap.

Do I think he''s a good player - yes.

Point in question however has to be asked is why if he is such a good player and available for such an apparently reasonable amount have NO clubs made an approach???

Sunderland would rather spend 2 million on Stokes and 5 million on Chopra than spend a guestimated £750,000 for Riordan - why?

Derby would rather look to pay 5 million for Championship level Kenwyne Jones, than they would sign Riordan.

Even the likes of Colchester would rather sign 41 year old Sheringham than look at Riordan.

The price of a player really is irrelevant in a lot of cases, and is far too often used as a stick to beat clubs/managers with. Who would you rather have and pay for - Henry for £16 million or Darren Bent for £16.6??? Shevchenko for £30 million or Van Persie for £3 million???

The fact is that there are quality players out there without needing to spend endless millions, we only paid £750k for Huckerby, £850k for Iwan and a paltry £135k for Gary Holt, all players that are highly regarded by the majority of fans. Yet it seems that if we make similar value signings now, we''re totally lacking in ambition and signing poor players.

If Samba comes in for a trial and does well, then why not give the guy some sort of deal? Even a 1 year deal is not a lot, and we could even offer a ''pay as you play'' contract to him.

I just can''t understand the mentality of some, by not even wanting to give a player a chance when it''s costing us nothing to do so? If the guys is garbage in his trial, then off he goes and what has it cost us? If however he shows some ability and the potential to do a job for us for not much cash, we should be looking to get him on board.

I think some just want us to spend money for the sake of it. Shrewd evaluations of players is one of the key marks of a good manager, you only have to look at the likes of Allardyce and Redknapp who have often signed players for peanuts who have performed very well, and are now worth a fortune, e.g. Ben Haim and his Chelsea move, if he wasn''t out of contract they would have got approx £8 million for a player who cost them £150k just over 2 years ago. Hardly bad business is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its all conjecture how ,much grant had to spnd, how do we know that the payments recieved from earnie and etuhu and safri arent gonna be coming in in instalments, if i rmember rightly wasnt ashtons in instalment with add ons,   who on this forum can actually say they are 100% factfull with there knowledge on the transfer kitty, i cant and i guess many of you cant eiher, wat we do know is that grant has spent, and hes spent a lot more then worthless did in the last 2 seasons bar the transfer for earnie, but even then thats all conjecture on my part as most of the fees were undisclosed, for all we know we couldve paid peanuts for all of th players,   a transfer is made up of the followingplayers transfer feesigning on feeplayers wagesplayers agents fees,( we know we pay for em as its said on clubs site that weve reduced amount paid to em)all this money has to come out of the transfer kitty and players fund, i for one am happy to see anypne come to the club wether free or for a fee or on loan providing there right for the club, as ive said in a previous post all these players could be fantastic and a bargain and then ud all be saying what a great eye grant has for a bargain, the guy cant win if he doesnt spend his budget you all whinge lack of funds and lack of ambition, and if he does spend it all and things go tits up ull be slagging him off for bring the club to ruin.who cares what the transfer kitty amount is and the cost of these players and lets just get behind the team whoevers playing for them and bring back the fan spirit and make fortress carrow road what it was in our promotion winning seasoni for one am looking forward to the new season and will be backing the team i love and support,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully support the team and Grant.  I welcome any decent player here irrelvant of price or if they are free.  I also welcome giving any potential free transfer a trial.  I have never said anything to the contrary, and have repeated similar to this in other threads.

However, there is a difference between giving a trial and signing a player permanently.  If you sign a free transfer permanently you are paying their wages, and the potential waste of money on a player who would be a gamble in an area that is fairly strong compared to the defence, would be an unnecessary risk.

I don''t know how much players were sold for and how much replacements cost or how the money from player sales is being paid in instalments if any.  What I do believe from the transfer activity is that we have received more than we have spent, this however is just my opinion. 

Grant can win for me, I support Grant. 

What I don''t get is that all talk of recent signings has been loans, why?  The defence is in dire need of strengthening, and whether this guy is free or not, sod that, why waste resources on bringing a striker here?  We do need other players but the season kicks off in under 48 hours, we are in desperate need of a defender, I believe we need 2 defenders.  At such a late stage why isn''t all energy and resources being focused on bringing a defender to the club? 

Yes I know the transfer window does not shut on Saturday but we are scrapping around with other championship clubs for loans now and missing out on them, Carter has gone to Preston, Shawcross to Stoke.  Because IMHO Grant, through no fault of his own, has such a limited transfer budget, he has been forced to compete in the loans market at such a late stage - I believe the board has put Grant in such a ludicrous situation through restricting his funds, which so far (Smith aside), in reference to a defender and cover for injuries has not been successful.

I know we need a defender, Grant knows we need a defender, I would hope that some other fans would also agree that we need a defender, and I also hope the board can see that we need a defender.  Yet to me it appears that Grant has not been given the funds to go out and buy one, which is why we are left in the situation described in the paragraph above.

This is not directed at anyone in particular, just a general confirmation of my views.

Yes I would love to see Riordan here, but at this stage only secondary to the defense.

Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes a defender is needed but davenport isnt the one for me, west ham have valued him at 3mil which os far o much for a player of davnports talents, the guy is hardly gonna be a regular is he, i personally would welcome a loan signinjg from someone like man u or chelsea cos lets face it there ryouth teams are easily a match for most of the other prem teams henc why there youngsters are so sought after on loandidnt birmingham do well with some loan sigings and lupoli at derby certainly did himself justce, so i dont care if there loans, who knows if we get a decent couple of loans in we can then buy them permanently when we reach the prem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]other fans would also agree that we need a defender, and I also hope the board can see that we need a defender.  Yet to me it appears that Grant has not been given the funds to go out and buy one, which is why we are left in the situation described in the paragraph above.[/quote]The problem is quite simple, and that is that there just aren''t very many good quality centre halves available for anywhere near sensible money.

£2 million + for Davenport, you''re having a giraffe.

Unless you''re looking to bring in either someone near the end of their career, a young prospect or an unproven foreign player, you just can''t get a top quality centre half for less than 3-4 million. We sign the old guy - we''re buying has beens, we sign the youngster - he still needs to develop and is probably not better than what we already have, or we sign the foreigner and have no guarantee about how they are likely to perform in this league.

If it''s that easy to get quality defenders, why has it took Allardyce nearly 2 months to get 2 of them in at Newcastle? One of which is a 31 year old on a free, and the other is a Czech international who cost £2.7 million. So the team renowned for having vast funds available has bolstered their poor defence with a free transfer and an unknown quantity in Rozenhal...Where''s the big name players? Where''s the guaranteed quality there?

It''s got to be worrying when a premiership club known for offering lavish wages with fanatical support is struggling to attract good defensive talent, so what chance has Grant got?

Personally I''d rather give the likes of Spillane, Jarvis, Halliday etc a chance, than blow 1-2 million on an average player who isn''t going to significantly improve on what we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to wonder how close to suffolk some of the posters on here live.

Some ''pimply fred'' working for one of the ''red tops'' puts a transfer rumour in his rag and mugs on here use it as a stick to beat the club with.

There is no evidence that supposed transfer targets have joined other clubs because of lack of funds. Clubs will have their own value of a player. These values will change from club to club.

For many on here buying a player would seem as complicated as spending their paper round money. In their world all players are much the same irrespective of any baggage they might carry. No family ties, no social problems and no injury concerns.

Unfortunately this simplicity is carried over in their eternal belief that the club ''lacks ambition''. A wonderful bleat that acts as a ready excuse for those unable (or unwilling) to engage in the reality of running a multi million pound concern. Sadly for them the danger in actually taking on board another view might be that their conspiracy theory of the club running away with most of the money might prove to be groundless.

But then, if your true alliegiance is to a club that has the financial competence of a third world, banana republic it is not hard to think that all other clubs are run the same way, or wish they were !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

Spot on Broadslim, imo this is FACT.

[/quote]

If it was FACT, you wouldn''t need to say it was your opinion.....would you?

What Broadslim has written is not FACT it is his opinion, you do understand the difference don''t you? He''s entitled to his opinion, as I am to mine and you are to yours. But just because you agree with him does not make his opinion FACT, anymore than the fact that I disagree with him makes his opinion incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

Spot on Broadslim, imo this is FACT.

[/quote]

If it was FACT, you wouldn''t need to say it was your opinion.....would you?

What Broadslim has written is not FACT it is his opinion, you do understand the difference don''t you? He''s entitled to his opinion, as I am to mine and you are to yours. But just because you agree with him does not make his opinion FACT, anymore than the fact that I disagree with him makes his opinion incorrect.

[/quote]

Well said Shack.......I think......

10/10[*] possibly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is better as a central defender -

Doherty or Shackell?

IMHO Shackell.  I am not saying Shackell is outstanding here mind you.  But good enough for the Championship and with the right coaching he can improve.

How much would we get if we sold Shackell?  IMHO £1m at the most. 

IMHO on that basis, are there no players of equal quality to Shackell, who would be better than Doherty, available for around that price, or even worth a bid at least?  IMHO there must be.  Forgot actually signing one, which is a complicated business, the worying thing for me is that we are not even being linked with anybody.  The only defender we have been linked with recently is Shawcross on loan.  It appears that we are not being linked with any defenders to sign permanently.  If this is the case why? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

Spot on Broadslim, imo this is FACT.

[/quote]

If it was FACT, you wouldn''t need to say it was your opinion.....would you?

What Broadslim has written is not FACT it is his opinion, you do understand the difference don''t you? He''s entitled to his opinion, as I am to mine and you are to yours. But just because you agree with him does not make his opinion FACT, anymore than the fact that I disagree with him makes his opinion incorrect.

[/quote]

Shut up im sick of these silly quotes being posted. You stick with your opinion i''ll stick with mine......Simple really is it not? i take it YOU understand this is MY opinion. When i use the word FACT i mean it in the sense that its FACT that we have signed cheaper players to the ones we have sold and also of a lesser quality, and i really cant listen to people who will say Cureton is better than Earnie or Smith/etuhtu [not to say he wont be in time]. Im no mug so dont try and make me out to be one..at the end of the day the club will prove whos right.FACT is we have become an average team JUST ASK CARTER!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...